PURPOSE: Standardized added metabolic activity (SAM) is a PET parameter for assessing the total metabolic load of malignant processes, avoiding partial volume effects and lesion segmentation. The potential role of this parameter in the assessment of response to chemotherapy and bevacizumab was tested in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with potentially resectable liver metastases (mCRC). METHODS: (18)F-FDG PET/CT was performed in 18 mCRC patients with liver metastases before treatment and after five cycles of FOLFOX/FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. Of the 18 patients, 16 subsequently underwent resection of liver metastases. Baseline and follow-up SUVmax, and SAM as well as reduction in SUVmax (∆SUVmax) and SAM (∆SAM) of all liver metastases were correlated with morphological response, and progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS). RESULTS: A significant reduction in metabolic activity of the liver metastases was seen after chemotherapy with a median ∆SUVmax of 25.3% and ∆SAM of 94.5% (p = 0.033 and 0.003). Median baseline SUVmax and SAM values were significantly different between morphological responders and nonresponders (3.8 vs. 7.2, p = 0.021; and 34 vs. 211, p = 0.002, respectively), but neither baseline PET parameters nor morphological response was correlated with PFS or OS. Follow-up SUVmax and SAM as well as ∆SAM were found to be prognostic factors. The median PFS and OS in the patient group with a high follow-up SUVmax were 10.4 months and 32 months, compared to a median PFS of 14.7 months and a median OS which had not been reached in the group with a low follow-up SUVmax (p = 0.01 and 0.003, respectively). The patient group with a high follow-up SAM and a low ∆SAM had a median PFS and OS of 9.4 months and 32 months, whereas the other group had a median PFS of 14.7 months and a median OS which had not been reached (p = 0.002 for both PFS and OS). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET imaging is a useful tool to assess treatment response and predict clinical outcome in patients with mCRC who undergo chemotherapy before liver metastasectomy. Follow-up SUVmax, follow-up SAM and ∆SAM were found to be significant prognostic factors for PFS and OS.
PURPOSE: Standardized added metabolic activity (SAM) is a PET parameter for assessing the total metabolic load of malignant processes, avoiding partial volume effects and lesion segmentation. The potential role of this parameter in the assessment of response to chemotherapy and bevacizumab was tested in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with potentially resectable liver metastases (mCRC). METHODS: (18)F-FDG PET/CT was performed in 18 mCRC patients with liver metastases before treatment and after five cycles of FOLFOX/FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. Of the 18 patients, 16 subsequently underwent resection of liver metastases. Baseline and follow-up SUVmax, and SAM as well as reduction in SUVmax (∆SUVmax) and SAM (∆SAM) of all liver metastases were correlated with morphological response, and progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS). RESULTS: A significant reduction in metabolic activity of the liver metastases was seen after chemotherapy with a median ∆SUVmax of 25.3% and ∆SAM of 94.5% (p = 0.033 and 0.003). Median baseline SUVmax and SAM values were significantly different between morphological responders and nonresponders (3.8 vs. 7.2, p = 0.021; and 34 vs. 211, p = 0.002, respectively), but neither baseline PET parameters nor morphological response was correlated with PFS or OS. Follow-up SUVmax and SAM as well as ∆SAM were found to be prognostic factors. The median PFS and OS in the patient group with a high follow-up SUVmax were 10.4 months and 32 months, compared to a median PFS of 14.7 months and a median OS which had not been reached in the group with a low follow-up SUVmax (p = 0.01 and 0.003, respectively). The patient group with a high follow-up SAM and a low ∆SAM had a median PFS and OS of 9.4 months and 32 months, whereas the other group had a median PFS of 14.7 months and a median OS which had not been reached (p = 0.002 for both PFS and OS). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET imaging is a useful tool to assess treatment response and predict clinical outcome in patients with mCRC who undergo chemotherapy before liver metastasectomy. Follow-up SUVmax, follow-up SAM and ∆SAM were found to be significant prognostic factors for PFS and OS.
Authors: Bernard Nordlinger; Eric Van Cutsem; Philippe Rougier; Claus-Henning Köhne; Marc Ychou; Alberto Sobrero; Rene Adam; Dag Arvidsson; Alfredo Carrato; Vassilis Georgoulias; Felice Giuliante; Bengt Glimelius; Markus Golling; Thomas Gruenberger; Josep Tabernero; Harpreet Wasan; Graeme Poston Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Steven M. Larson; Yusuf Erdi; Timothy Akhurst; Madhu Mazumdar; Homer A. Macapinlac; Ronald D. Finn; Cecille Casilla; Melissa Fazzari; Neil Srivastava; Henry W.D. Yeung; John L. Humm; Jose Guillem; Robert Downey; Martin Karpeh; Alfred E. Cohen; Robert Ginsberg Journal: Clin Positron Imaging Date: 1999-05
Authors: Herbert Hurwitz; Louis Fehrenbacher; William Novotny; Thomas Cartwright; John Hainsworth; William Heim; Jordan Berlin; Ari Baron; Susan Griffing; Eric Holmgren; Napoleone Ferrara; Gwen Fyfe; Beth Rogers; Robert Ross; Fairooz Kabbinavar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: L F de Geus-Oei; H W M van Laarhoven; E P Visser; R Hermsen; B A van Hoorn; Y J L Kamm; P F M Krabbe; F H M Corstens; C J A Punt; W J G Oyen Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: I M E Desar; C M L van Herpen; H W M van Laarhoven; J O Barentsz; W J G Oyen; W T A van der Graaf Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2009-01-10 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Seon Ae Roh; In Ja Park; Yong Sik Yoon; Yi Hong Kwon; Jin Hwa Chung; Tae Won Kim; Dong Hyung Cho; Byung Ho Lim; Seon Kyu Kim; Seon Young Kim; Yong Sung Kim; Jin Cheon Kim Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2016-05-13 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: M Colombié; L Campion; C Bailly; D Rusu; T Rousseau; C Mathieu; L Ferrer; N Rousseau; F Kraeber-Bodéré; C Rousseau Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-07-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Barry H Smith; Lawrence S Gazda; Thomas J Fahey; Angelica Nazarian; Melissa A Laramore; Prithy Martis; Zoe P Andrada; Joanne Thomas; Tapan Parikh; Sudipta Sureshbabu; Nathaniel Berman; Allyson J Ocean; Richard D Hall; David J Wolf Journal: Chin J Cancer Res Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: Okker D Bijlstra; Maud M E Boreel; Sietse van Mossel; Mark C Burgmans; Ellen H W Kapiteijn; Daniela E Oprea-Lager; Daphne D D Rietbergen; Floris H P van Velden; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg; J Sven D Mieog; Lioe-Fee de Geus-Oei Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2022-03-15